National’s Hutt South MP Chris Bishop was confronted before last year’s election by a mother upset at the older man messaging her daughter and other minors.

Witnesses said Bishop was taken aside and asked to stop what he was doing.

“I wanted to confront him as many parents felt very uncomfortable that their children were messaged,” said a mother who wanted to remain anonymous.

“He admitted it straight away and thanked me for bringing it to his attention.”

Another mother, whose 13-year-old daughter was allegedly in daily contact with Bishop for a week or two on Snapchat, took to Facebook to vent her frustration.

The mother, who also wanted to remain anonymous, allegedly wrote to MP Paul Goldsmith to complain about Bishop’s behaviour.

None of the parents were concerned that Bishop’s intentions were anything other than misguided.

Note: “None of the parents were concerned that Bishop’s intentions were anything other than misguided”. In other words, this was a non-story.

But it has become a dirty politics story, with claims that it was an internal National Party hit job, and counter claims that it was a diversionary hit from Labour.

When David Farrar posted about it at Kiwiblog as Anonymous innuendo – some will see some irony in his comment “Disappointed Fairfax has run a story like this, with anonymous sources” – Matthew Hooton both played down what Bishop had done, but blamed National party insiders:

I guess the problem with Snapchat is the lack of a record. But I have no doubt the exchanges were as anodyne as when MPs usually communicate with school kids who contact them. This is a hit job, presumably by people associated with Bill English against one of the new MPs seeking generational change.

Note ‘presumably’ – in other words, no evidence. And:

This is the sort of thing that happens when National has a subterranean internal war. People just forget, because it’s been more than 10 years since the last one. But Labour also on the suspect list, of course. But, if it was them, I think they would have dropped it during the election campaign.

Plus speculation that it could have been Labour.

Cameron Slater went further – much further, delving into extreme dirty politics with carefully worded (arse-covering) insinuations. I won’t repeat the dirt, but Slater claimed:

Yesterday there was a hit job on National MP Chris Bishop.

When someone commented ” I am also upset to see comments from some that they think it came from Bill English” Slater replied “Because it did. Join the dots.”

I’ll join some dots – Slater has no evidence, Slater has a long standing grudge against Bill English, Slater has attacked Bishop before, and Slater’s word is wothr bugger all, he has a reputation of being wrong and making up malicious shit. He repeats:

“Not the left. Internal Nat hit job.”

“My information suggests it was a Blue on Blue hit job.”

Note ‘suggests’. No evidence at all.

But Bill does, to protect himself. As Sally points out, if Labour had this they would have dropped it the week before the election. This is patch protection from National party players.

That sounds like nothing more than speculation laced with a long standing grudge.

Why the hell would National, who spent last week playing down leadership speculation and papering over any internakl division, do a dirty on a popular MP?

Why is this a story now? Because it’s a Labour Party hit job. That’s what I think.

I’ll be honest. I knew about this before the election. I knew there were messages about this. Guess how I found out? From the Labour Party. The Labour Party knew about this. So the only reason it has been delayed is probably because the parents would finally talk about it.

The Labour Party has probably been working on the parents to try and get them to talk to the media. So this in my opinion is a Labour Party hit job. And I think it’s actually disgusting to be honest.

The vilification of Bishop is sick, mainly by those with warped minds, and is obviously politically motivated, curiously coming at a time when Labour was on the ropes over its unfathomable closure of charter schools!

Also no evidence that Labour was behind the stuff story. But this deserves more investigation, whether National or Labour are behind the attack smear.

This is dirty, and I think alarmingly so. Disregarding the Slater sleaze, the insinuations against Bishop, even though the original story said “None of the parents were concerned that Bishop’s intentions”, are dirty politics at it’s worst.

Colin Craig and his party are in a mess and it’s largely of their own doing. But there’s questions that seem to have escaped scrutiny.

Timing

It’s been claimed that parts of the story surrounding ‘inappropriate behaviour’ have been around since Rachel MacGregor’s sudden resignation two days before last year’s election. She was obviously very unhappy about something and she wasn’t sharing her decision with Craig – he was surprised to find out via media.

So why has it suddenly been pushed with specific details published and promises of more to come? Why specifically now? Was it timed to coincide with a coup attempt or has the leak launch just happened to coincide with the attempt to kick Craig out of the leadership and party?

Source of the leaks

Craig has been slammed for breaching a confidentiality agreement.

Rachel McGregor has claimed she speak up with her side of the story because of the confidentially agreement.

But someone who must have been close to MacGregor leaked detailed information and evidence to ‘Whale Oil Media’ and to journalists from other media organisations.

Information that originally at least only MacGregor could have had copies of, on paper and in electronic form.

So who has leaked to Cameron Slater and others? How did they get the information? And why have they leaked?

Identity of the leaker

I’ve been informed “from reliable sources” of the identity of who has leaked to Slater. This person must presumably have some connection to MacGregor. They also have interesting (in this context) political connections.

They also have a history of close ‘Dirty Politics’ connections with Slater.

I haven’t seen any fuss about this from the left. They seem to be preoccupied with celebrating the Conservative train wreck. If the Slater revelations were targeting a party on the left their would have been an immediate ‘Dirty Politics’ outcry. The apparent lack of interest in this aspect of the Conservative hit job is curious.

If my source of the identity of the person who leaked to Slater is accurate then it should be of significant political interest beyond the Conservative Party.